TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 1745
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (i) An ECIR bearing No. 18/2022 was recorded on 21.10.2022 based on Bariatu P.S. Case No. 141 of 2022 dated 04.06.2022, registered undersection 420, 467 and 471 of IPC, against Pradeep Bagchi on the basis of complaint of Tax Collector of Ranchi Municipal Corporation for submission of forged papers i.e. Aadhar Card, Electricity Bill and Possession letter for obtaining holding number 0210004194000A1 and 0210004031000A5. Investigation revealed that by submitting the forged documents, a holding number was obtained in name of Pradeep Bagchi for property at Morabadi Mouza, Ward No. 21/19, Ranchi having an area of the plot measuring 455.00 decimals approx. at Ranchi. (ii) Investigation further revealed that the above property belonged to Late B.M. Laxman Rao which was given to the Army and had been in the possession of the Defence, in occupation of the Army since independence. Investigation reveals that by way of creating a fake owner (Pradeep Bagchi) of the above said property, it was sold to one company M/s Jagatbandhu Tea Estate Pvt. Ltd for which the consideration amount was shown Rs. 7 crores which was highly under value and out of this amount Rs. 7 crores payment amoun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....06.2024 which reads as under: "Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following ORDER After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, we do not find that at this stage a case is made out for grant of bail Hence, the Special Leave Petition is dismissed. Pending application also stands disposed of." 4. The petitioner has again renewed his prayer for bail before the learned trial Court in MCA No.2671 of 2024 for grant of regular bail which has been rejected by the learned trial Court vide its order dated 24.09.2024. Thereafter, he approached before this Court for grant of regular bail by way of filing the instant bail application. Argument on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner: 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has taken the following grounds that:- (i) the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the prosecution complaint and the petitioner has no concern with the land in question. (ii) The proceeds of crime are only be said to be proceeds of crime, if it is obtained from the scheduled offence. (iii) The petitioner is facing prosecution on the b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll be said to be respective of the proceeds obtained from the scheduled offence, rather, even in case of proceeds of crime if has been obtained other than the crime as under the scheduled offence, then also the ingredients of Section 3 of the P.M.L. Act, 2002 will be applicable. (iii) Learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Party-E.D. has taken the ground that the petitioner is having direct nexus with the other co-accused persons namely, Amit Kumar Agarwal, Pradip Bagchi, Afshar Ali, Mohd. Saddam Hussain, Imtiaz Ahmed, Chhavi Ranjan, Faiyaz Ahmed, Bhanu Pratap Prasad, in the commission of crime in facilitating the 'proceeds of crime'. (iv) The co-accused of this case have also confessed that the petitioner was a part of the aforesaid racket and used to assist in selling fraudulently acquired lands in connivance with other accused persons. (v) The accused person acquired proceeds of crime through his company, Confiar Projects Pvt. Ltd., account 921020002279585 maintained in the name of Axis Bank. In his Axis Bank account, 9180200064516549, proceeds of crime amounting to Rs. 12,35,56,621 were credited during the period from June 15, 2019, to June 7, 2023, o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (xiii) The issue of prayer for bail of the present petitioner has already been adjudicated by this Court on merit in B.A.No.10296 of 2023 which was rejected vide order dated 12.04.2024. In pursuance to the same, the petitioner had filed an SLP No. 7674 of 2024 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which was dismissed vide order dated 25.06.2024 wit direction to expedite the trial, as such neither fresh ground is available nor any change in circumstances is there, therefore it is not required to again adjudicate the prayer for bail of the petitioner a fresh. 9. Learned counsel for the opposite party-ED, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that since the nature of allegation committed by the present petitioners are serious, as such, the instant bail application is fit to be rejected. Analysis 10. It is evident from record that an ECIR bearing No. 18/2022 was recorded on 21.10.2022 based on Bariatu P.S. Case No. 141 of 2022 dated 04.06.2022, registered undersection 420, 467 and 471 of IPC, against Pradeep Bagchi on the basis of complaint of Tax Collector of Ranchi Municipal Corporation for submission of forged papers i.e. Aadhar Card, Electricity Bill an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of his bail but the same was rejected vide order dated 25.08.2023 by the AJC-I-Cum Special Judge, CBI-Cum- Special Judge under PMLA at Ranchi. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court with a prayer for grant of regular bail in B.A No.10296 of 2023 which was rejected by this Court vide order dated 12.04.2024. 16. After rejection of prayer for bail of the petitioner by this Court vide order dated 12.04.2024, the petitioner approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court for grant of regular bail in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).7674 of 2024 but the same was rejected vide order dated 25.06.2024. 17. The petitioner has again renewed his prayer for bail before the learned trial Court in MCA No.2671 of 2024 for grant of regular bail which has been rejected by the learned trial Court vide its order dated 24.09.2024. Thereafter, he approached before this Court for grant of regular bail by way of filing the instant bail application. 18. At the outset the learned counsel for the ED has contended that since the issue of prayer for bail of the petitioner has already been adjudicated by this Court on merit in B.A.No.10296 of 2023 and which was rejected vide order dated 12.04.2024....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The properties are used to commit offences under this Act and scheduled offences and derive proceeds, further projecting their activities and acquired properties as 'untainted property'. 58. It is evident from the prosecution complaint that co-accused of this case have also confessed that the petitioner is a part of the racket and used to assist in selling acquired lands fraudulently in connivance with other accused persons. He and his accomplices, illegally acquired a piece of land measuring 60 decimals situated at Plot no. 668, Khata no. 29, Mauja Gari, P.S Bariatu, Ranchi by way of a forged sale deed from the office of the Registrar of Assurances, Kolkata, falsely showing an amount of Rs. 4 crores. The accused person acquired proceeds of crime through his company, Confiar Projects Pvt. Ltd., account 921020002279585 maintained at Axis Bank. In his Axis Bank account, 9180200064516549, proceeds of crime amounting to Rs. 12,35,56,621 were credited during the period from June 15, 2019, to June 7, 2023, out of which Rs. 1,28,74,000 was siphoned off in cash. When asked about the significant cash deposits totaling Rs.87,97,029 in his Axis Bank Bariyatu account bearing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s recorded in a diary recovered from his possession during the search on 13.04.2023. Images of the diary are provided in paragraph-9.6.4 of the prosecution complaint, showing payments of Rs.17,29,100/- to Sunny @ Talha Khan. The distribution of proceeds of crime is depicted in the diary, linking the accused persons to their fraudulent activities of acquiring and disposing of land, and subsequently acquiring the proceeds of crime. 63.The statement of Faiyaz Khan mentioned at paragraph-8.5 of the prosecution complaint reveals that he has used an Axis Bank account bearing no. 920010047770735, through which several large-value transactions have been made with Md. Saddam Hussain, Talha Khan and Greensoil Enterprises. 64.The statement of Pradeep Bagchi, as mentioned in paragraph 8.6 of the prosecution complaint, reveals the involvement of Afshar Ali, Imtiaz Ahmed, Md. Saddam Hussain, Talha Khan @ Sunny (the present petitioner), and Faiyaz Khan in manipulating sale deeds of landed properties. They paid him money to stand as the owner property on of the forged sale deeds. Bagchi further disclosed that he had signed as approximately five sale deeds, the owner for of which ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resent petitioner was dismissed on 12.04.2024, therefore, the aforesaid ratio is referred for consideration of this Court. 25. Thus, in the aforesaid context, this Court is of the considered view that it is the bounden duty of this Court to appreciate the aforesaid particular contention of the learned counsel for the applicant. 26. Before appreciating to the aforesaid contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court thinks fit to discuss the provision of law particularly Section 50 as contained under the Act, 2002 with its object and intent as also the legal proposition as settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in various judgments. 27. The Act 2002 was enacted to address the urgent need to have a comprehensive legislation inter alia for preventing money-laundering, attachment of proceeds of crime, adjudication and confiscation thereof including vesting of it in the Central Government, setting up of agencies and mechanisms for coordinating measures for combating money laundering and also to prosecute the persons indulging in the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. 28. It is evident that the Act 2002 was enacted in order to answer the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....operty not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence. 33. The "property" has been defined under Section 2(1)(v) which means any property or assets of every description, whether corporeal or incorporeal, movable or immovable, tangible or intangible and includes deeds and instruments evidencing title to, or interest in, such property or assets, wherever located. 34. The schedule has been defined under Section 2(1)(x) which means schedule to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The "scheduled offence" has been defined under Section 2(1)(y) which reads as under: "2(y) "scheduled offence" means- (i) the offences specified under Part A of the Schedule; or (ii) the offences specified under Part B of the Schedule if the total value involved in such offences is [one crore rupees] or more; or (iii) the offences specified under Part C of the Schedule." 35. It is evident that the "scheduled offence" means the offences specified under Part A of the Schedule; or the offences specified ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... property in any manner whatsoever. 39. The punishment for money laundering has been provided under Section 4 of the Act, 2002. 40. The various provisions of the Act, 2002 along with interpretation of the definition of "proceeds of crime" has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors., (2022) SCC OnLine SC 929 wherein the Bench comprising of three Hon'ble Judges of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have decided the issue by taking into consideration the object and intent of the Act, 2002. 41. The predicate offence has been considered in the aforesaid judgment wherein by taking into consideration the explanation as inserted by way of Act 23 of 2019 under the definition of the "proceeds of crime" as contained under Section 2(1)(u), whereby and whereunder, it has been clarified for the purpose of removal of doubts that, the "proceeds of crime" include property not only derived or obtained from the scheduled offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence, meaning thereby, the words "any property which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts of the legislation in the form of the 2002 Act and the background in which it had been enacted owing to the commitment made to the international bodies and on their recommendations, it is plainly clear that it is a special legislation to deal with the subject of money laundering activities having transnational impact on the financial systems including sovereignty and integrity of the countries. This is not an ordinary offence. To deal with such serious offence, stringent measures are provided in the 2002 Act for prevention of money laundering and combating menace of money laundering, including for attachment and confiscation of proceeds of crime and to prosecute persons involved in the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. In view of the gravity of the fallout of money laundering activities having transnational impact, a special procedural law for prevention and regulation, including to prosecute the person involved, has been enacted, grouping the offenders involved in the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime as a separate class from ordinary criminals. The offence of money laundering has been regarded as an aggravated form of crime "world....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed is not guilty of the offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. 47. In the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.(supra) as under paragraph-284, it has been held that the Authority under the 2002 Act, is to prosecute a person for offence of money-laundering only if it has reason to believe, which is required to be recorded in writing that the person is in possession of "proceeds of crime". Only if that belief is further supported by tangible and credible evidence indicative of involvement of the person concerned in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime, action under the Act can be taken forward for attachment and confiscation of proceeds of crime and until vesting thereof in the Central Government, such process initiated would be a standalone process. 48. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gautam Kundu vs. Directorate of Enforcement (Prevention of Money-Laundering Act), Government of India through Manoj Kumar, Assistant Director, Eastern Region, (2015) 16 SCC 1 has been pleased to hold at paragraph -30 that the conditions specified under Section 45 of PMLA a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts below. The guidelines are as under: 'Categories/Types of Offences (A) Offences punishable with imprisonment of 7 years or less not falling in Categories B & D. (B) Offences punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for more than 7 years. (C) Offences punishable under Special Acts containing stringent provisions for bail like NDPS (Section 37), PMLA (Section 45), UAPA [Section 43-D(5)], Companies Act, [Section 212(6)], etc. (D) Economic offences not covered by Special Acts. REQUISITE CONDITIONS (1) Not arrested during investigation. (2) Cooperated throughout in the investigation including appearing before investigating officer whenever called. (No need to forward such an accused along with the charge-sheet (Siddharth v. State of U.P. [Siddharth v. State of U.P., (2022) 1 SCC 676 : (2022) 1 SCC (Cri) 423] ) CATEGORY A After filing of charge-sheet/complaint taking of cognizance (a) Ordinary summons at the 1st instance/including permitting appearance through lawyer. (b) If such an accused does not appear despite service of summons, then bailable warrant for physi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ule." 52. The reason for making reference of this judgment is that in the Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and Anr (supra)'s judgment, the UAPA has also been brought under the purview of category 'c' wherein while laying observing that in the UAPA Act, it comes under the category 'c' which also includes money laundering offence wherein the bail has been directed to be granted if the investigation is complete but the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gurwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab and Anr. (supra) has taken the view by making note that the penal offences as enshrined under the provision of UAPA are also under category 'c' making reference that jail is the rule and bail is the exception. 53. In the backdrop of the aforesaid legal provisions and settled law this Court is now adverting to the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is facing prosecution on the basis of the statements of co-accused recorded under section 50 of the PMLA which as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Prem Prakash v. Union of India through the Directorate of Enforcement" (supra) cannot have the character of substantive evidence. 54. For proper appreci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... claimed to contain incriminating material against the maker, would be admissible under Section 50? 33. In the facts of the present case, we hold that the statement of the appellant if to be considered as incriminating against the maker, will be hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act since he has given the statement whilst in judicial custody, pursuant to another proceeding instituted by the same investigating agency. Taken as he was from the judicial custody to record the statement, it will be a travesty of justice to render the statement admissible against the appellant. 34. The appellant-accused cannot be told that after all while giving this statement: "you were wearing a hat captioned 'ECIR 5/2023' and not the hat captioned 'ECIR 4/2022' ". 58. Herein the present petitioner has been arrested on 14.04.2023 and as per para 8.7. of the prosecution complaint he has given his statement on 13.04.2023 (RUD No.68 and 69) which was recorded under Section 50 of Act 2002 wherein he accepted his involvement in land dealings of 3.81 acres with Afshar Ali, where 30-40 decimals of land were sold through him despite not being documented. Further his statement was recorded ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itnesses/accused are admissible in evidence in view of Section 50 of the said Act and such statements may make out a formidable case about the involvement of the accused in the commission of a serious offence of money laundering. Further, as held in Vijay Madanlal (supra), the offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the Act is an independent offence regarding the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime which had been derived or obtained as a result of criminal activity relating to or in relation to a scheduled offence. The offence of money laundering is not dependent or linked to the date on which the scheduled offence or predicate offence has been committed. The relevant date is the date on which the person indulges in the process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime. Thus, the involvement of the person in any of the criminal activities like concealment, possession, acquisition, use of proceeds of crime as much as projecting it as untainted property or claiming it to be so, would constitute the offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the Act. 64. So far as the issue of period of custody as agitated by learned counsel is concerned, it i....